Talk:Newton
Format for systems and planets I would like to propose a format for all star systems in Mass Effect. Currently each planet has its own page and for the majority this is a few paragraphs and some statistics. I believe that not only should we be comprehensive as a wiki but that each page should be valuable in terms of content. I have done a rewrite of the Newton system with the format I'm proposing for all systems. I choose Newton because User:Nmrahde did such a good job with the articles that make up this system. I propose moving all planets in-game description and statistics to the system's page and planets that can be landed upon have a tag on the systems page and also a complete article. To ensure that all planets correctly list in the Category:Planets, planets without their own article would be redirected to the system page. That redirect would be categorized allowing the redirected planet's name to appear in the category list, but users will be automatically sent to the system page for the information. --avfanatic (talk) 01:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC) : Man, just saw the update now about Newton. Wish I had read it before adding all the info for the Sol system LOL. Well time to play more, discover, new systems, add to the ever-growing notepad file of things, and then back here to add some. --User:Nmrahde 28 November 2007 ::Hadn't seen this before I redid the Argos Rho cluster, and I like it much more than the generic system pages I've seen. I especially like the redirect for most planets, with a {main} tag for the landable ones. I'm in favor of a more general, assignment focussed cluster page above this level though (see here), rather like this is the more general page above specific entries for landable worlds. While this is great information and a great way to organize the little details that make the game, I don't think you should have to navigate down to the system level to get an overview of the assignments in it. ::Definitley makes sense, and it'll make it easier to navigate. Any dissenting opinions?Io Dragone 02:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC) ::Nope. I'm for it as shown. --TarkisFlux 01:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC) Ok, organizational question on this style. You've got the planets in here in alphabetic order... Where would you put asteroid fields in an alphabetic structure? What about the few moons in the game, still attached to their worlds or written up where they fall in the alphabet? What do you think about writing systems up inner planets -> outer planets instead? --TarkisFlux 05:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC) :I would put them in orbital order (inner -> outer). Moons could either be a sub-heading under the planet they orbit or a separate heading. All moons appearing in the game can be landed on, yes? So they'd have a tag regardless. I would move everything not listed on the planet's in-game description (such as Newton#Ontarom) to their main page with the exception of a " Missions and assignments " listing for each applicable planet. :I adjusted Newton to show the changes in format (I don't know orbital order). --avfanatic (talk) 15:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC) I would prefer planets getting their own page, even if there's only a paragraph of information about them. I am submitting the system and planets pages as samples of what I have already done. Systems: Antaeus, Matano, Refuge. Planets: Chasca, Apo, Ploba --Montuno (talk) December 31, 2007